維護家庭聯盟等不滿南華早報扭曲教會立場（2月28日消息）

維護家庭聯盟等不滿南華早報扭曲教會立場
（2月28日消息）

時代論壇 / 2005年2月28日

維護家庭聯盟以及一群關注性傾向歧視立法的教牧信徒，聯合發表一封「致各教會函」，題為「性傾向歧視立法迫在眉睫　南華早報扭曲教會立場　教會還能閉口不言嗎？」，就1月27日《南華早報》提到「沒有一間代表了香港大多數基督徒群體的主流教會，是反對性傾向歧視法這意念的。」 "None of the mainstream churches, representing most of Hong Kong's Christian community, oppose the idea of a Sexual Orientation Discrimination Ordinance." （Tim Cribb's "Justice for All"）表示不滿，他們呼籲教會要盡快表態。

聯署牧函的教牧信徒包括：從心會社社長吳思源、香港教會更新運動總幹事胡志偉牧師、陳黔開牧師、曾錫華牧師、基督徒學生福音團契總幹事劉國偉、明光社總幹事蔡志森、中國神學研究院副教授鄭順佳博士、浸會大學宗教及哲學系副教授關啟文博士及性傾向歧視立法關注組召集人麥沛泉等。

該函件內容如下：

民政事務局正積極部署為性傾向歧視立法。先在第二季進行問卷調查，後在立法會討論。若法例得以通過，莫說教牧傳道難以鼓勵同性戀信徒接受聖經教導或輔導，會友在聚會中發表支持同性戀言論也難以阻止，更遑論執行紀律了；不然可能被當作歧視，對簿公堂。若然入罪，更可招致牢獄之災 (外國已有類似案例) 。而因著法例，政府會為對方繳付一切訴訟費，但教會需一力承擔訴訟過程時中的一切損失。那麼如何有心力牧養群羊？

再者，雖然現時政府對性傾向定義只包括異性戀、同性戀和雙性戀，但在學術定義上也可包括多個性伴侶、多男多女組合、孌童、偷窺…，甚至性虐待、戀屍等，是個可任意填上內容的符號，故這是一條十分危險的法例，將來有機會在詮釋法例時被擴闊其定義。屆時教牧傳道因法例所限，無法向這些說「不」，否則會觸犯性傾向歧視條例，那麼如何按聖經真理牧養被性困擾的信徒？

性傾向歧視法肯定會對教會的宗教自由和辦學自由等帶來嚴重衝擊，我們深信很多堂會都是反對的，但社會需要聽到你們公開表達聲音。

不要以為教會可以自動得到豁免，一些同志團體和議員並不會輕易讓教會獲得「特權」。就算比較溫和的邵國華(性權會主席)也清楚在論壇說：就算教會聘請牧師可獲豁免，但若聘請與宗教活動無關的員工（如會計、堂役）則不能，教會辦的青年中心和學校等當然更不能豁免，福音機構和神學院也難免受衝擊。某前衛人仕甚至指出，教會崇拜屬提供服務，必須受法例規管。

今天不為我們自己的權利爭取，法例一旦通過了則後悔莫及了！

請貴教會／機構今天就行動：
寫信給《南華早報》抗議它無理的說法；
在執事會正式通過反對性傾向歧視立法的立場，並找專人關注此事件；
向政府（如民政事務局）和傳媒表達你們的意見。
參與我們最近成立的「性傾向歧視立法關注組」。

南華早報全文，性傾向歧視法對教會衝擊的例子，和我們反對這法例的理由，以及「性傾向歧視立法關注組」的資料都可到www.sexculture.org.hk , www.truth-light.org.hk網頁查看。

南華早報電郵： [email protected]    傳真：(852)2811-1048
民政事務局電郵：[email protected]   傳真：(852)2591-6002
行政長官辦公室：[email protected]    傳真：(852)2509-0577

如有任何查詢，請與香港性文化學會的幹事黃小姐 3165-1858或明光社的余先生 2768-4204聯絡。

（www.christiantimes.org.hk，時代論壇每日快拍，2005.2.28）

舊回應18則

虞瑋倩 / 2005-03-02 23:08:58

To 翱長空

性文化學會和明光社幾個不 Biblical 的做法
1) 把同性戀和其他侵犯性的性罪行掛鉤﹐其實兩者沒有關係
2) 對性傾向歧視立法一味反對﹐而忽視同性戀者也有面對其他不同的歧視
3) 使用江湖騙子的資料 (Paul Cameron)

Liberal / 2005-03-02 22:40:37

Names

names = names given to stereotyped roles

翱長空 / 2005-03-02 22:06:28

一點評論

Liberal君說：Love, not names (father, mother, husband, wife) nor duties specifiec to either gender...

因他認為names and duties are culturally-conditioned and are not absolute truths

但他接著道：as far as love is upheld, the core of mariage is maintained... LOVE your spouse as yourself, this IS marriage!

問題：他立論中的marriage和spouse已是一些names，已是culturally-conditioned clothes，自打咀巴。

至於虞君說：「性文化學會既做法唔見得好Biblical」，但全文只是提出過「我暫時仍然對他們的策略和方法並不滿意和信任」，策略和方法未被認同，與做法唔見得好Biblical，應是沒有甚麼關係的。

Liberal / 2005-03-02 13:41:47

MATTHEW 7:21-23

MATTHEW 7:21-23 "21 Not everyone who says to Me, `Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22 Many will say to Me on that day, `Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' 23 And then I will declare to them, ` I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'"

"who says to Me, `Lord, Lord,'" = those people who think who to believe in is more important than practicing love

"who does the will of My Father" = those who practice love to the marginalized and oppressed, which is exactly THE example demonstrated by Jesus, the God-incarnate; they are not necessarily religous people, they are not necessarily christians

虞瑋倩 / 2005-03-02 13:37:44

To Kar Yan NG: 性文化學會既做法唔見得好Biblical

我暫時仍然對他們的策略和方法並不滿意和信任。你成日話邊D人 liberal 咩野咩野﹐我就真擔心性文化學會﹑明光社等好學唔學﹐學美國那套所謂基督教價值。

Liberal / 2005-03-02 13:28:48

God is living.

God is living and reveals to the human race continuously. Bible is but one way through which God reveals to mankind. We cannot assume God's revelation cannot be found in Nature, science, philosopy, and sacred scriptures of world religions. Many biblical ideas are culturally-conditioned and "biblical truth" can only be distilled through radical interpretation of biblical text in the light of modern human knowledge.

Be very careful when your attempt to protect your traditional belief undermines love, or else you may be surprised by the Lord's response when you meet him face to face someday!!

Kar Yan Ng / 2005-03-02 13:11:41

To liberal and others who have liberal inclination

Biblical love is grounded in biblical truth.Be very careful about what you believe, or else you may be surprised by the Lord's response when you meet him face to face someday!!

http://www.afcministry.com/Does_it_really_matter.htm

Liberal / 2005-03-02 11:02:09

To Kar Yan Ng: LOVE is the essence of marriage

love, not names (father, mother, husband, wife) nor duties specific to either gender (male should be the bread winner? can female win the bread? female should cook? can male cook? only male can lead the family? why not female?...), is the essence of marriage

names and duties are culturally-conditioned and are not absolute truths

as far as LOVE is upheld, the core of marriage is maintained

by removing unimportant culturally-conditioned clothes of marriage such as names and gender-specific duties, love can be emphasized

LOVE your spouse as yourself, this IS marriage!

Kar Yan Ng / 2005-03-01 00:21:35

Man as wife and woman as Husband in Canada

The following is an interesting quote from http://www.nationalreview.com/frum/frum-diary.asp.

(David Frum is a conservative Canadian political comentator who had been a speech writer for President G. W. Bush)

(Andrew Sullivan is an Harvard-educated economist. He is a gay activist currently residing in Britian)

Seven years ago, Andrew Sullivan and I [David Frum] conducted a fierce debate in Slate about same-sex marriage. Along the way, I hazarded this prediction:

"Andrew, three years after we permit gay marriage, it will be illegal for schools to send home printed forms with one blank for the mother's name and one blank for the father's."

Did I say three years? In Canada, it's taken barely one.

In the province of Ontario, the words "wife," "husband," "widow," and "widower" are now all to be stricken from the law. The words "mother" and "father" cannot be far behind.

If this is true for Canada, it will not be surprising if the gay activists will press for the same in Hong Kong eventually. As David Frum pointed out:

Ontario's action is a reminder that same-sex marriage is not just the extension of an existing legal status to previously excluded persons. Same-sex marriage is a revolution in the definition of marriage for everyone - a revolution not just in law, but in consciousnessness.

And one effect of this revolution - and for many proponents, one of the revolution's aims - is to make forever unthinkable the idea that husbands and wives each have special duties to one another, and that a husband's duties to his wife - while equally binding and equally supreme - are not the same as a wife's duties to her husband.

Once we lose that knowledge, we lose the basic grammar of marriage. It is one more reminder that in the same-sex marriage debate, we are debating not marriage's change - but marriage's overthrow.

Hong Kong Christians should know that the stake of this battle is very high.

佚名Anonymous / 2005-02-28 22:53:56

其實有冇人睇過南華早報篇文？

除左維護家庭聯盟個句，有冇上文下理？個南早記者係咪真係作到咁大，吹水唔抺嘴？

路人甲 / 2005-02-28 22:05:39

屬靈爭戰？

其實甚麼事都可以說成屬靈爭戰的：今天要早起身，明天要忠心在公司工作，對人要誠實．．．．．．．甚至Ken_S要在這裡寫他的言論。當我們尊重別人的領受，也就不會對他們的靈爭戰言論指手劃腳，但是若要別人認同自己所領受的屬靈爭戰，發起行動去抵抗一些事情，那就是另一回事。別人可質疑究竟有沒有這必要，言論是否過於煽情，理由是否充份。

虞瑋倩 / 2005-02-28 18:19:13

Ken_S ﹕ 立法根本未必會造成逼迫

不過﹐基督教今次回應立法﹐策略太差。

虞瑋倩 / 2005-02-28 18:08:42

反性傾向歧視也可以修訂到容納基督教教會的

1) 例如現有性別歧視法例有很多場所和業務是得到豁免的﹐基督教應該詳細研究他們不同機構﹑教會運作裡面如何可以取得豁免
2) 如果佛教場所不容許人們宣揚吃葷﹑殺生等等﹐基督教同樣可以得到豁免
3) 防止 hate crime 條文引入﹐因為條文含糊﹐不但基督教會入法網﹐連不少機構也會墮入去

最重要﹐基督教不要再用一刀切的方法抗拒立法。一來﹐基督教在實際上面並不鼓吹歧視同性戀者 (我相信 Ken_S等人肯定也認同這點罷﹖)﹐而是在理解﹑實踐上面和同性戀者﹑一般人有極大分歧。現在基督教自己在對法例缺乏研究下﹐只靠一個策略(反對任何立法)﹐是很難保證同一議題不會重現。
你今日打得低咨詢﹐日後可能不會做得到。任何議員隨時可以提出草案 (除非永遠冇立法會普選)。
今日﹐你以為投票可以把議員趕走﹐其實今次是拜一個有“缺憾”的選舉投票方法才可以得手。過得一些年日﹐立法會不再使用比例代表制/名單投票制﹐基督教界的票數是根本無足左右大局的。
相反﹐如果立法方向是保護了同性戀的合理權益 (例如就業﹑居住等)而同時不干犯家庭制度﹐也容許宗教團體繼續宣揚其教義﹐其實才對教會最有利的策略。

因信稱義 / 2005-02-28 16:58:39

明刀明槍來可過溫水煮蛙

基督教似乎被當作傳[統道德守護者],說真的中國傳統文化一樣掘抗拒同性戀,其他宗教亦不見得容忍同性戀,可是撒旦真懂得找對頭人!
上次立法會選舉,不少民主派支持者就是因為某民主派參選人支持同性戀而改投左派一票,始果大家都知道了,既然有制度可以制衡不合民意的法案,何不要求民選議員在同性戀問題上表態?如果不等符民意的大家要將之記錄在案,美國總統選舉給大家的教訓很清楚,政客敢逆民意而行的都沒有好下埸,沒有人可以向我們硬銷他們那一套今是而作非的所謂"普世價值"要我們屈膝!
當然成就事情的是保守我們的上帝,作為基督徒最重要的是藉著禱告向上帝支取力量,起來吧基督徒!這是一場戰爭,為了自己的下一代不被世俗荼毒與沾污,為了上帝的榮耀,站起來捍衛自己的信仰和價值觀吧!基督徒是可以說[不]的!

Ken_S / 2005-02-28 16:15:33

教牧應儘早教會眾在立法後如何繼續作鹽作光忠心見證

立法﹖ 基督徒不怕﹗ 跟家庭教會的處境相比﹐反性取向歧視法帶來的逼迫根本不是一回事﹐最多坐牢數月、罰款數千而已﹐沒有人可以向基督徒施以酷刑﹐只會有精神逼迫﹐不會有實質肉體逼迫﹐即使有﹐也只是坐牢而已。基督徒不要太怕﹐千萬別忘記基督徒在逼迫中才能體現更強的屬靈生命力。在逼迫中教會才能成長﹐才能比以前健康。

我覺得牧者必須儘早給會眾上一堂逼迫試煉的預備班﹐惡補逼迫的功課﹐這樣會眾就能做好充足準備﹐迎接立法後所有潛在的精神逼迫。要他們知道立法絕不是終結﹐世界的律法不能阻止基督徒堅持真理﹐基督徒不會向世界的律法妥協。罪就是罪﹐聖經的律法基督徒絕不會曲解。反歧視法不能迫使我們違背聖經。在歧視法面前﹐基督徒仍然會叫同志悔改﹐真牧師仍然會拒絕為同志伴侶祝福﹐主日學老師仍然會告訴初信徒同性戀是罪﹐不悔改的同志信徒仍然不會得到按立做牧師﹐高中生仍然會在倫理堂表明反對同性戀罪。

教牧真要先知先覺﹐好好將“立法非終結”的信息教導會眾。立法不是終結﹐只是另一個開始﹐另一個堅守正道的新開始﹐只是多了一些實質的逼迫罷了。

各位弟兄姐妹﹐大家一定要剛強起來﹐積極起來﹗

佚名Anonymous / 2005-02-28 14:02:17

『萬軍之耶和華說、不是倚靠勢力、不是倚靠才能、乃是倚靠我的靈、方能成事。』 (撒迦利亞書四章六節下).

『不是倚靠勢力、不是倚靠才能、不是靠異端異教、乃是倚靠神的靈、方能成事。』

虞瑋倩 / 2005-02-28 13:41:01

基督教不要單打獨鬥 -- 應該聚合其他宗教界出來

看來看去﹐我不相信這條法案會單單對基督教有衝擊﹐難道佛教贊成同性戀嗎﹖難道孔教﹑回教﹑天主教等會不受影響嗎﹖
單單基督教的聲音是太單薄了﹐為何那麼愚蠢學外國的手法只靠基督教呢﹖如果基督教無法聚合其他宗教界﹐就應該反省了。

佚名Anonymous / 2005-02-28 12:49:53

戰雲密佈!

我們基督徒該多禱告和全力反對同性戀.才能打敗魔鬼的詭計!

資料庫

昔日新聞